Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	king_n	law_n	prerogative_n	3,673	5	10.4433	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54842	An impartial inquiry into the nature of sin in which are evidently proved its positive entity or being, the true original of its existence, the essentiall parts of its composition by reason, by authority divine, humane, antient, modern, Romane, Reformed, by the adversaries confessions and contradictions, by the judgement of experience and common sense partly extorted by Mr. Hickman's challenge, partly by the influence which his errour hath had on the lives of many, (especially on the practice of our last and worst times,) but chiefly intended as an amulet to prevent the like mischiefs to come : to which is added An appendix in vindication of Doctor Hammond, with the concurrence of Doctor Sanderson, Oxford visitors impleaded, the supreme authority asserted : together with diverse other subjects, whose heads are gathered in the contents : after all A postscript concerning some dealings of Mr. Baxter / by Thomas Pierce ...	Pierce, Thomas, 1622-1691.	1660 (1660)	Wing P2184; ESTC R80	247,562	303

Kings Prerogative as well as Magna Charta is proved by Iudge Ienkins to be a principall part of the common Law and Royal Government a Law fundamental Nay 9. It is proved by the same most learned and pious Iudge That the Supreme power even in time of Parliament was declared by both Houses to belong unto the King 10. The Kings Supremacy hath been proved by so many Arguments out of Bracton as may be seen in Dudley Diggs The Reasons of the Vniversity of Oxford Iudge Ienkins and the like that I shall onely translate some few short passages into English The King saith he hath power and Iurisdiction over all who are within his Kingdome and none but He. Every one is under the King and he under God onely He hath no Peer or equal with his Kingdome m●ch less is inferiour unto his subjects God alone is his superiour and to God alone is he accomptable In a word The things that concern Iurisdiction and Peace or are annexed to peace and Iustice do belong to none but to the Crown and the Kingly Dignity nor can they be separated from the Crown for as much as the Crown consisteth in them 11. The Kings supremacy is evinced from the Nature of all his subjects Tenures they holding their Lands of him in Fee Whi●h though it gives a perpe●ual Estate yet is it not absolute but conditionall as depending on the acknowledgement of superiority and as being forfeitable upon the non-performance of some duties on which supposition it still returns unto the King For the breach of Fidelity is loss of Fee In short it is agreed among the most learned in the Law ● That the King alone hath such a property in all his Lands as Lawyers are wont to call Ala●dium because he doth hold in his own full Right without any service or payment of Rent because from God onely 2. That subjects of all Degrees do hold their Lands ut Feuda in the nature of Fee which implyes Fealty to a Superiour 12. The Oath of Allegeance hath the force of another Oath of Supremacy For Legiancy is defined to be an obligation upon all subjects to take part with their Liege Lord against all men living to aid and assist him with their bodies and minds with their advise and power not to lift up their arms against him nor to support in any way those that oppose him Now as no Liege Lord can acknowledge any Superiour and though bound to some duties is not bound under pain of Forfeiture so subjects on the other side are Homines Ligii all Liege-men owing him Faith and Allegiance as their Superiour Which Faith if they violate He is enabled by the Law as being the Fountain of Iurisdiction saith Master Diggs to seiz upon their Goods and Lands and to destroy their persons too Whereas if He fail in the discharge of his duty he is not subject to any Forfeiture by any Law of the Land I could ever hear of and Mr. Diggs hath challenged all the world to name any Doctor Sanderson also affirmeth That if a King who is Supreme should do the things that are proposed 1 Sam. 8. and Rule as a Tyrant by no other Law then his own hearts lust he would yet be unaccountable on this side Heaven however liable to the wrath of the Soveraign Iudge of all the World For however such a Tyrant may abuse his power yet the power is His which he abuseth and who shall say unto the King what dost thou Eccles. 8.4 a Text produced by the late King of most blessed Memorie against his own most unnatural and Blood Triers 13. There is an antient Monument saith Mr. Diggs p. 83. which shews the manner of holding a Parliament before the conquest The King is the head the beginning and the end of the Parliament and so he hath not any equal in his Degree This I cite to anticipate Mr. Hi●kman's possible objection 14. The King by Law hath just power to pass acts of Parliament by his great Seal to grant out Commissions of Oyer and Terminer for the holding of Assisses to adjourn the Term to whatsoever place he pleaseth To make Iustices of Peace which wholly depends on his will and pleasure To pardon Delinquents and Malefactors a priviledge by law estated solely in the King To choose his Officers to protect all persons to coin money to make leagues with forrein Princes to dispose the Militia to call and dissolve Parliaments And to be in one word Le dernier Resort de la Iustice. 15. In the thirty seventh Article of the Church of England The King or Queen is declared to have the chief Power in this Realm of England c. to whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain And this called the Prerogative which hath alwayes been given to all godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himself that they shall rule all Estates and all Degrees Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil sword the stubborn and evil Doers 16. And accordingly in the Canons by law established in the Church A Supreme Power is declared to be given by God in Scripture to the sacred order of Kings which is there also declared to be of Divine Right And that for any person or persons to set up maintain or avow in any their said Realms respectively under any pretence whatsoever any Independent co-active power either Papal or popular whether directly or indirectly is to undermine their great Royal office and cunningly to overthrow that most sacred ordinance which God himself hath established and so is treasonable against God as well as against the King This I earnestly recommend to Mr. Hickman his consideration and that which follows in the Canon viz. That for subjects to bear Arms against their Kings offensive or defensive upon any pretence whatsoever is at the least to resist the powers which are ordained of God And though they do not invade but onely resist 17. Saint Paul tells them plainly They shall receive to themselves damnation The most excellent Recognition which was made by both Houses in the first year of King Iames is so worthy to be written in Letters of Gold and so needfull to be rivetted in the hearts and memories of the people who desire to have a conscience void of offence towards God and men that I think I shall deserve many an honest man's thanks who hath either never known or hath forgot what once he knew by inserting some part upon this occasion The King is our onely rightfull and lawfull Leige Lord and Soveraign we do upon the knees of our heart adnize constant Faith Loyalty and Obedience to the King and his Royall Progeny in this high Court of Parliament where all the body of the Realm is either in Person or by representation we do acknowledge that the true and

Hypochondres as much as Fame hath affirmed it to have had dominion over his own I never was so inhumane as to upbraid my greatest enemy with any such bodily indisposition and have rather afforded my utmost help But since Mr. Hickman unprovoked could not abstain from objecting a sicknesse to me and such a sicknesse as I have ever by the blessing of God been exempted from it is his own fault onely though my misfortune that I am forced to expose him in this point also And for the future I do beseech him not to meddle in matters of which he hath not any knowledge nor to have so little mercy upon himself as to scourge his guilty self upon an innocent mans back but rather to conceal his great infirmities or onely reveal them to his Physician and apply himself to the means of cure I might in favour and mercy to him have prompted his Readers to believe that it was but his spleenative Conceit which made him say in his Epistle wherewith he dedicates his collection that the Doctrines printed before my birth were the meer chimaera's of my brain For which prodigious Adventure he is not capable of excuse unlesse his flatulent Hypocondres made him a kind of Pythagorean so as to fancy a transmigration of Calvin's soul into my body I am sure Pythagoras is reported to have thought himself to be Aethalides the son of Mercurie and that Aethalides being dead he became Euphorbus and that Euphorbus being departed he passed also into Hermotimus and that Hermotimus dying he lived in Pyrrhus the Fisherman And after Pyrrhus his decease he again survived in Pythagoras Sure 't were better for Mr. Hickman to think that my soul was once in Calvin or Zuinglius or Dr. Twisse then to call their writings the meer chimaera's of my brain or wilfully to deny what hath been read by thousands and may be seen in those Writers by all Mankind who can but read them The former I say were so much better then the later by how much better it is to be sick then sinfull And so 't were charity to imagine if that were possible to be done that this was one of Mr. Hickman's Hypochondriacal conceits § 76. It may be taken for one at least that he should charge me with Impudence against the Supreme Authority of the Nation p. 45. For if he deals syncerely as well as simply he hence inferr's the Oxford Visitors Mr. Cheynel and Mr. Wilkinson and such like things to have had the Supremacy in his opinion They alone being the men by whom I complaind I had been injur'd in their Transgressing the Prescriptions of those that sent them And loosers by a Proverb have still had liberty to complain I did but modestly hope Mr. Hickman would pay me my Arrears when again and again he tells his Readers I am impudent p. 45. and 47. so impudent I am as to own my Right though not so simple as to expect it And it is strange that Mr. Hickman should thus revile me for onely presuming to hope well of him or for refusing to dissemble what was so visibly my due So when the owner in the Parable sent for fruits of his Vineyard the Husbandmen abused his severall Messengers as well as sent them away empty I will not say of Mr. Hickman that he is impudent because his manners are none of mine but I must needs admire the strange nature of his modesty when he denyed a matter of Fact however attested by all mens eyes Sect. 77. If he means the two Houses by the Supreme Authority of the Nation as he seems to do pag. 47. he contradicts the fundamental Laws of the Land the Canons of the Church the Oathes of Allegeanc● and Supremacy and implicitely censures all the Members of the House of Commons by whom the Visitors were sent in the year 1648. as guilty of willful perjury when they took those oathes b●fore they sate or could sit as members in the House of Commons 1. The members of Parliament did even sw●ar in taking the Oath of Supremacy That the Kings Highn●ss is the onely Supreme Governour of this Realm and of all other his Dominions and Countreys as well in all Spiritual and Ecclesiasticall Things or Causes as Temporal 2. The King was ever acknowledged in the Prayers of the Clergie before their Se●mons to be the Supreme Head and Governour in all Causes and over all P●rsons Ecclesiasticall and Civill Nor may we think that the Clergie were either taught o● commanded to lye to God in their Publick prayers Nay 3. he was utt●rly testified and in conscience declared as well by the members of Parliament as by other subjects upon oath to be not onely the Supreme which shews that none can be above him but Solus Supremus Moderator as Dr. Sanderson observes the Sole and Onely Supreme Head and Governour which shews that none can be so besides him or that none can be equal to him 4. In the generall judgement of knowing men and of Dr. Sanderson in particular The Kings Supremacy is imported by the stile of Dread Soveraign and Soveraign Lord and that of Majesty expressions used by the two Houses of the late long Parliament in their h●mble Petitions and addresses unto the King nor need I here tell my Reader what an humble Petition is set to signifie and as well in the most solemn establishment of Laws as in actions and forms of Jurisdiction 5. Magna Charta was first granted in effect by King Iohn and confirmed with that Title by Henry the third of his mere free will and so the liberties of the subject cannot with reason be presumed to lessen the King of his Supremacie 6. Other Statutes which have the force of Acts of Parliament are known to be directed as private Writs with a Teste Meipso And the common stile of most others is found to run in this strain The King with the advice of the Lords at the humble Petition of the Commons wills this or that so the form of passing Bills is still observed to be this L● Ro● le veult The King will have it And s●it faict comme il est desiré Let it be done as it is desired plainly speaking by way of Grant to something sought or petitioned for From whence by some it hath been gathered that the R●ga●ion of Laws does rightly belong to the two Houses but the Legislation unto the King That their Act is Prepar●tive his onely Iussive 7. That Supremacy of Power which the Law hath invested the King withall is not onely over all particular persons but also over all states which all the subjects of this Realm and the Members of Parliament in particular are bound by oa●h both to acknowledge and to maintain And which they grant to be his Due when they desire him to protect them in their priviledges and call him alwayes in their Acts Their onely Soveraign Lord or their Royal Soveraign 8. The

altogether lighter then vanity it self which will be granted by all the world to have positive beings yet doth he not say in any one text That sin is nothing in the world or that Blasphemies and Rapes have no positive being but on the contrary sins are said to be the works of men and devils And now to prevent any exception to the propriety of the word § 2. Those are properly called sins which God himself in his written word doth commonly call by that name And how many things are there that have positive entities or beings by the very confession of Mr. H. and all that are of his way of which wickednesse and sin are found to be predicated in scripture As for example For the man to lie with the Masters wife Ioseph called a great wickedness and a sin aginst God To take another mans wife was called a great sin by King Abimelech And Ieroboam in driving Israel from following the Lord is said to have made them sin a great sin Davids sin is called a deed that is an act or fact 2 Sam. 12 14. If St. Paul had not thought that some sins are actions and that other sins are qualities he would not certainly have told us of the motions of sins and the lusts of sins The motions of sins which were by the Law did work in our members to bring fruit unto death Rom. 7.5 So in the 7. verse of that Chapter he expresseth sin by lust as lusting by coveting And yet so far is the Apostle from ascribing those positive things to God that speaking there of wilful sin in the person of a Carnal unregenerate man the doing that which he would not do he doth not add like Mr. Hickman It is not I that DO it but GOD that DOTH it in me No his words on the contrary are justly these It is no more I that do it but SIN that dwelleth in me That I may not be over-long in so clear a case I fain would know of Mr. Hickman whether those works of the flesh which are manifest saith the Apostle and set in opposition to the fruits of the spirit and by an opposition of contrariety too Gal. 5.17 I say I would know of Mr. Hickman whether those lusts of the flesh are not properly called sins And whether Adultery Fornication Vncleanness Lasciviousness Idolatry Witchcraft Hatred Variance Strife Seditions Heresies Envyings Murders Drunkenness Revellings and such like have not real and positive beings He will not sure deny this because he knows that these things are either qualities or actions Nor can he deny they are sins because they are set in a contrariety to the Fruits of the spirit and because it is added presently after that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God And as I take it they must be sins for which the Doers are to suffer the loss of heaven which is waited on with the paines of Hell too When Iudas said I have sinned in that I have betrayed innocent blood Cain complained that his sin was greater then he could bear meaning the killing his brother Abel who sees not that sin is predicated in Recto of two such actions as are granted by all the world to have positive beings It is but dipping into the Scripture to finde abundance of such examples § 3. 'T were easy to write ● just volume in shewing the concurrence of Antient F●THERS and even the least that I can shew with a desire of Brevity will be more then Mr. Hickman was able to wrest to his seeming interest I cannot better begin then with the great ATHANASIUS whom several mens misapprehensions have helpt to speak for their judgement against his own First he delivers his true meaning when he useth the expression of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 applied to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And therefore with the Apostle he first applies it unto Idols which had as positive beings as those that made them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Next he sets down the reason why he useth that expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and his reason is because they are not from him who is indeed the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but from those free and depraved Agents who revolting from their maker made them Idols or Gods of their own invention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 4 where the lusts of the flesh which he calls the body are given as Instances of the sins to which the creature was now descended and by much repetition had made habitual After this he asserteth the opposition of contrariety twixt vice and virtue thereby proving the positivity as well of the one as of the other And giving examples of those actions as well as qualities which man is able to produce by being a voluntary Agent abusing the Liberty of his will to desires and lusts of his own forging he names the committing of Adultery Murder Rebellion Blasphemies Comumelies Perjuries plundering Beating Gluttony Drunkenness which though granted by all the world to be positive things are affirmed by that Father to be the wickednesse and sin of the soul of man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 6. And to make it yet more undeniable that he opposeth his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the excellent Creatures of God himself whom he often calls the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not to all that hath a positive being He sets Concupiscencies or Lusts in opposition to the Creature that is the creatures of wicked men in opposition to those of God Then shewing the power of the soul to incite the members of the body and of her self to excite her self he saith in the concrete she formeth evil unto her self And so he proceeds to shew the errour of certain Graecians who held sin to have a substance and not to be a meer accident A substance created by a God too whom they would have to be coeternal with the Father of Lights and the maker of sin as a second Nature which from all eternity was collaterall with the First First in Dignity though not in Time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 6. which shews Mr. Hickman the strange Impertinence of what he citeth from Athanasius p. 76. not onely quite beside but as I shall shew when I come thither against his purpose For the Father having proved against those hereticks That there is one onely God and that evil is a thing temporal not derived from God but from the voluntary creature indued with liberty of will goes on for several whole pages to speak as much for my purpose as I can wish him He shews the folly of their distinction who so endeavour to put a difference betwixt the act of h●ting God and the sin of hating God which they call the obliquity of the act as to affirm the first to be from God and therefore good the other evil and from the Creature whereas 't is impossible saith the Father that

sincere Religion of the Church is continued and established by the King And do recognize as we are bound by the law of God and man the Realm of England and the Imperiall Crown thereof doth belong to him by inherent birthright and lawfull and undoubted succession and submit our selves and our posterities for ever untill the last drop of bloud be spent to his rule and beseech the King to accept the same as the first fruits of our Loyalty and Faith to his Majesty and his posterity for ever and for that this Act is not compleat nor perfect without his Majesties assent the same is humbly desired This proves saith Judge Ienkins 1. That the Houses are not above the King 2. That Kings have not their titles to the Crown by the two Houses but 3. by inherent birth-right and 4. That there can be no Statute without his express assent and so 5. It destroyes the Chimaera of the Kings virtuall being in the Houses 18. The Kings Proclamations heretofore to severall purposes were of no less force then Acts of Parliament And the ground of it was that the supremitie of the Regal power is given by God And however that Act was indeed repealed by the meek concession of King Edward the sixth yet the Reason of the Repeal is recorded to have been this A willingness in the King to gratifie his people up●n trust that they would not abuse the same but rather be encouraged with more faithfulness and diligence to serve his Highness So when Charles the First passed a Bill for the continuance of the long Parliament indefinitely it was upon their promise that the gracious favour of his Majesty expressed in that Bill should not encourage them to do any thing which otherwise had not been sit to be done And so good is the Rule in the Civil Law Cessante causa cessat Lex That the Lords and Commons even of that very Parliament did d●clare it to hold good in Acts of Parliament 19. When 't was declared by all the Iudges and Sergeants of Law that it cannot be said the King doth wrong it was by a Periphrasis A Declaration of his Sup●emacy For the meaning of it must be say the greatest Lawyers That what the King doth in point of Jurisdiction he doth by his Iudges who are sworn to deal legally between the King and his people So as the Judges may be questioned for violation of Law but the King is unaccountable and on his person or power no Reflection is to be made § 78. Thus I have given such an account of the proper subject of Supremacy as my Notes of Observation suggest unto me at this time I gather'd my Notes more especially for my private use and information that I might know what Party I ought to own in these times of Triall and Temptation partly out of the Papers which passed betwixt the King and both Houses of Parliament partly from the writings of Mr. Prin Mr. Diggs Iudge Ienkins and Dr. Langbane partly out of the Book of Statutes though I have not time to consult them much Many more Arguments I could urge out of the works of Iudge Ienkins but that I find them too many to be transcribed in this Appendix and withall I consider that book is cheap and little and I hope easily to be had which makes me choose to referr my Readers to his whole Lex Terrae from page 8. to page 63. I have been so convinced by all put together which hath been said as I cannot but conclude with the most Learned and moderate Doctor Sanderson That at least amongst us here in England there can be nothing more certain or conspicuous unless we will not use our eyes but rather choose to be blind at noon by stoutly winking against the Sun then that the power of these Three Kingdoms doth onely belong to his Serene and Supreme Royall Majesty This is said by that great and judicious Casuist in his stating the obligation and efficient cause of humane Lawes After which if Mr. Hickman shall yet contend that the Oxford Visitors were commissioned by the Supreme Authority of the Nation though by the two Houses onely not onely without but against the pleasure of the King I will onely referr him to certain Notes on the Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance in a late-Printed Book which is thus ●ntitled The Resurrection of Loyalty and Obedience out of the Grave of Rebellion § 80. But I printed saith Mr. Hickman as if I had right to two Fellowships and asks how else he is but one of my receivers p 46. To which I answer 1. That for any thing I know Mr. Hickman succeeded him that succeeded me And my words of him were these that for ought I know he may be in possession of mine own fellowship c. Or 2. If he did not succeed my successor but that his Robbery is immediate not once removed I will give him an Answer to chew upon out of the Digests When a number of men do jo●● their strength to steal a piece of Timber or any thing else which is anothers which none of them singly could have carried away Vlpian saith that each of them severally as well as all of them joyntly is lyable to an action for the double value of the thing And so when the right of a Society is invaded by a Society which was our case in Magd. Colledge when almost all were at once bereaved by men of violence all may require their right of all and every man from every man For every man by partnership is an Accessary to all that have done the wrong as well as principall in part and indefinitely and so responsible to all who receive the wrong or do require a reparation I could prove to Mr. Hickman that he is guilty of the Visitor's sin by accepting the spoils of their injustice But I am ready to pardon though not to dissemble my being injur'd § 81. I had but said by such a figure as is allowable in Scripture It seems the Visitors made him one of my Receivers and Vsu-fructuaries when taking my words by the wrong handle he pretends that His is the usus-fructus p. 46. But 1. he knows I there added That my legitimate Successor they could not make him which is a proof that what I spake was of what they did not ought to do And a Facto ad Ius no good Argument is to be drawn The Visitors made him my Receiver as they made their strength the law of justice Or as Lambert made Cromwell the Kings Receiver 'T is easie for one man to be m●de an other man's Receiver and yet by a Proverb to be as bad as the thief that made him The sons of violence and rapine made one another what they pleased as opportunity and power was in their hands So it was said by Doctor Heylin that Mr. Hickman had made a Book But he presently added As